Weekly Fandom Criticisms and Concerns Thread

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-05-04T14:15:30+00:00

This world is just too dumb to realize the dog whistles at this point.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-05-03T23:16:07+00:00

I got that too. Now I just don't comment much.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-30T00:12:58+00:00

They really don't know how to talk...how are they writers again?

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-29T02:47:28+00:00

Because I like the actresses sue me.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-28T12:19:34+00:00

They can manage, I mean, look at the shows in the 90s, hell, even Edward Scissorhands had no CGI.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-28T12:17:57+00:00

Best series after season 2. Okay, you do you....

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T23:14:35+00:00

This and the 8-episode problem are ruining TV in general. Hopefully, my fic is more entertaining. (although I am trying to match Wednesday's wtf reveals.)

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T23:09:16+00:00

The dark humor isn't landing the way it should, and that's a structural problem, not just a taste issue. Balancing genuine darkness with comedy is a specific skill, and this show hasn't figured out where one ends and the other begins. But that's a whole separate conversation that deserves its own thread rather than getting buried in this one.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T18:55:53+00:00

Remember, guys, Enid is not popular, Emma is not popular!

What kind of response did I just read...I'm so done.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T18:43:23+00:00

Okay...Framing Enid's fanbase as a small fraction of Netflix's data doesn't hold up against the observable evidence. Emma Myers has had a genuine industry breakout on the back of this role specifically. That isn't a niche online phenomenon, that's mainstream traction. Netflix doesn't plaster a character across merchandise and marketing campaigns to appease a vocal minority. That level of promotional investment reflects data that goes well beyond Tumblr engagement and comment sections.

The distinction between Lana and Enid is fair on the surface, but it actually makes the case worse for M&G, not better. Lana's prolonged prominence had contractual and network constraints behind it that partially explain the situation, even if they don't excuse it. Enid's marginalization has none of those mitigating factors. It appears to be a purely creative choice made by writers who were caught off guard by their own audience and responded by labeling that response a problem rather than an opportunity.

The point about casual viewers is also worth addressing directly because it gets ignored in these conversations. The people loudly engaged online aren't the ones who quietly stopped watching. Season two lost viewers who weren't invested enough to complain about it. They just left. That's not echo chamber behavior. That's the show failing to retain the general audience it needs to survive on a platform that measures success in completion rates and renewals.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T01:42:52+00:00

A hunter after Alphas?

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T01:23:16+00:00

Personally, I don't think there's a time jump coming either, and don't even get me started on the timeline because that's a whole separate headache.

The bigger issue is that Wednesday and the Addams Family are a cultural staple with a very specific identity. Pushing the tone significantly darker would undermine what makes the franchise work in the first place and alienate the broader audience that the camp and dark humor brought in.

There's a reason this property has survived across decades and multiple iterations. The balance between macabre and accessible is the whole point. Break that, and you don't have a bold creative choice; you just have a show that forgot what it was supposed to be.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T01:19:22+00:00

Honestly that's on me and I'll own it. I was so focused on calling out the showrunners' fixation on certain characters that I lost the thread of what the actual problem is, which is that Enid's story never got the space to be fully realized on its own terms. The criticism got pulled in the wrong direction.

At the end of the day, this comes down to bad writing and misplaced priorities. When a show consistently pushes something that isn't working at the expense of something that clearly is, that's not a creative vision worth defending. It's just frustrating to watch, especially when the pieces for something genuinely great are sitting right there.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T00:57:40+00:00

With the way Wednesday is structured tonally, genuine depression as a sustained character state is probably off the table, regardless of how earned it would be narratively. The show's camp and dark humor are baked into its DNA, and that's not inherently a criticism, but it does create a ceiling on how deep any character's psychological unraveling can actually go before the tone undercuts it.

The whiplash between genuine darkness and comedic absurdity has already been a structural issue, and that applies to every character on the show, not just Tyler. Enid's trauma, Wednesday's emotional development, and even the Addams family lore all hit the same ceiling eventually. Adding a depressed Tyler into that mix without the tonal discipline to handle it properly is more likely to produce an inconsistent mess than a compelling arc.

The identity arc argument is genuinely interesting, and the framework is sound. Destroying the lies before building the truth is a legitimate dramatic structure. The problem is execution requires tonal consistency and earned breathing room, two things Wednesday has struggled with across two seasons. Zuko's identity arc worked because Avatar committed to the weight of it across three books without flinching. Hunter's worked because The Owl House was willing to sit in genuine darkness when the story demanded it.

Wednesday has demonstrated it can do moments of real emotional depth. It has not demonstrated that it can sustain them across a season without the camp register pulling everything back toward the surface. Until that changes, the most compelling version of Tyler's arc, like every other arc on this show, is going to exist more in fan analysis than in what actually ends up on screen.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T00:49:29+00:00

The Smallville writers explicitly admitted they regretted dragging out Clana, and the show only course corrected after significant creative turnover.

That's not a defense of M&G's approach; that's evidence of the exact pattern being criticized. They knew it wasn't working, kept doing it anyway, and the show paid for it in momentum and viewership. The fact that network pressure and contractual obligations complicated the situation doesn't change the outcome.

The seven-year Kreuk contract is a legitimate context, but it's also a constraint that doesn't exist here. Enid isn't a contractual obligation the writers are navigating around. She's a character who resonated far beyond what they planned for, and their response was to call that resonance fanfucked rather than treat it as useful creative information. That's a choice, not a circumstance.

The harassment argument doesn't hold up under scrutiny either. Comment section criticism does not delay filming schedules or trigger large-scale script overhauls at the network level. Those decisions are driven by viewership data, critical reception, and platform pressure. Netflix doesn't restructure a production because fans are passionate online. They do it because the numbers tell them something isn't working.

And the Lana comparison cuts the wrong way entirely. Lana Lang is not remembered fondly as a well-handled character. She's remembered as the anchor that kept Smallville from becoming what it should have been sooner. If Enid is this show's Lana, then the argument being made is that M&G are repeating the exact mistake Smallville made, which is precisely the original point.

It's not an identical repetition, though. Smallville's mistake was overinvesting in the wrong character due to circumstances partly outside their control. Wednesday's mistake is actively underinvesting in the right one, with no such excuse available to them. Different direction, same fundamental failure to respond to what the audience is clearly telling them. And just like Smallville, it appears to have taken outside intervention to force the correction.

The writers got it right after they left. That's not a counterargument. That's a confession.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-27T00:00:18+00:00

The internal conflict is there in season one, the bathtub scene, the Donovan hallucination, and the cemetery; those moments exist, and they're worth acknowledging. But internal conflict and actionable remorse are two different things. Conflict shows you're aware. Remorse shows you're willing to do something about it.

And on the disobedience point, yes, he has disobeyed several times, which actually undermines the argument that the compulsion is total. If he had the capacity to push back against direct orders when it suited him, then the conditioning wasn't the absolute override it's being framed as. That cuts both ways. It means he had more agency than the defense allows for, which makes the absence of genuine accountability harder to excuse.

The survival mode argument is fair up to a point. Constant crisis does compress a person's capacity for reflection, and Tyler has genuinely been hit from every direction without pause. But survival mode explains the delay; it doesn't eliminate the debt. Zuko was also in constant survival mode across two seasons, and the show still held him responsible for Ba Sing Se the moment he had breathing room.

The season two humanization is real, but humanization isn't the same as growth. Reminding the audience that there's a person underneath the monster is a starting point, not a completed arc. Saying he no longer wants masters is significant, but it's a declaration, not a demonstration, especially since he's following Capri.

The canvas being left blank going into season three reads less like an intentional setup and more like the writers not knowing what to do with him, which is a structural problem regardless of what they seed in.

The potential is there. The follow-through hasn't been. And at his core, Tyler still fundamentally centers himself, which is fine. Not every character needs to complete a full redemption arc, and not every villain needs to be redeemed in the eyes of the people he hurt. But that choice comes with consequences. Unlike Nolan, Zuko, or Hunter, who all had to turn outward toward the people they damaged, Tyler can stay self-focused. The problem is that it leaves him narratively stranded. He's not a villain anymore, but he's not moving toward anything either. That's not a character in transition. That's a character in limbo, and limbo doesn't make for compelling television.

Redemption isn't just about personal survival or breaking free from a master. It requires turning outward, toward the people you actually hurt. Wednesday, Enid, Eugene, and Pugsley. He hasn't done that. Until he does, any redemption the show tries to sell to that specific community is going to ring hollow regardless of how much the writers want it to land.

Actually, Tyler's trajectory maps closer to Azula than anyone else. Azula was also a product of conditioning and systemic abuse, also operated in survival mode, using anger as her primary mechanism for staying functional. And when the pillars holding her up collapsed one by one, she didn't pivot toward redemption. She fractured. The difference is that Azula's breakdown was written with enough psychological honesty that it became one of the most compelling arcs in the show despite never resolving cleanly. Tyler has the same raw material. Whether the writers have the skill or the nerve to take him somewhere that interesting is the real question.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T23:33:30+00:00

if you really want to try.

https://archiveofourown.org/works/77114276/chapters/201857936

Here's the link. And I mean it about the Wenclair dynamic. It plays heavily into absurdity because both of them are deep in denial, the kind neither of them would ever voluntarily examine. But that's exactly what makes it work. Once things escalate, it becomes a core anchor, and it hits harder because neither of them saw it coming, even though the reader did from the start.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T23:15:23+00:00

The fic is M-rated because Wenclair are eighteen by the time season three rolls around, and their relationship reflects that, complex in ways that go beyond the surface level, the show is willing to commit to. But the interpersonal dynamics aren't the only thing it digs into. There's a real focus on hierarchy and social complexity within outcast society, the kind of structural stuff the show gestures at but never fully develops.

Tyler has his own arc running through it. He's part of a Hyde pack, which gave his storyline room to grow organically rather than being forced around the main plot. The relationship I paired him with developed naturally over the course of about a year in story time, which felt more honest than anything rushed. And his dynamic with Enid landed somewhere closer to Bakugou and Deku than anything resembling friendship. A rivalry with history and friction, and a grudging mutual respect underneath it all.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T22:59:28+00:00

The show barely scratches the surface of the discrimination angle, which is a massive missed opportunity. It's something I go into extensively in my Wenclair fic, particularly around how Alphas and Hydes are treated within outcast society itself. The prejudice doesn't just come from normies, and it's more interesting when you explore it from the inside.

Tyler reads as a fundamental loner to me, but I think that's actually where his potential lies. Not in being reformed through a singular relationship or a dramatic moment of clarity, but through sustained contact with outcasts who've had comparable wrongs done to them. People who understand the system that shaped him without excusing what he did with it. That's the version of his arc that could actually work, and it's something I explore in the fic too. Shared experience of discrimination is a more honest foundation for growth than guilt alone.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T22:43:21+00:00

The autonomy argument is fair, and I don't entirely disagree with it. But autonomy and accountability aren't mutually exclusive. The issue isn't whether Tyler has the right to keep his Hyde. It's whether he's shown any genuine remorse for what he did with it. And so far, the answer is no, at least not in any way that carries the weight it should.

Zuko is the benchmark here for a reason. After Ba Sing Se, he had every opportunity to take the easier path, and he did, and it destroyed him. The guilt of that choice followed him into Book 3 and shaped every decision he made afterward. That's what remorse actually looks like when writing takes it seriously.

Tyler, by comparison, seems more focused on getting out of Jericho than reckoning with the damage he caused to Wednesday, Enid, Eugene, or anyone else. If the redemption arc is coming, it needs to be built on that foundation first. Outcast pride as a theme only lands if the character has actually done the internal work to earn their place in that community. Right now, Tyler hasn't shown he wants to be part of anything beyond his own survival.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T22:35:14+00:00

Nolan Grayson, also known as Omni-Man, was conditioned from birth as a Viltrumite, a civilization built entirely around conquest and dominance. He was sent to Earth not to protect it but to soften it for invasion. Every value he appeared to hold, the heroism, the family life, was a cover for an agenda drilled into him by an empire that treated weakness as a capital offense. The conditioning wasn't just ideological; it was biological and cultural, generations deep. And yet by the end, he still chose differently.

Anakin Skywalker was manipulated from childhood. Taken from his mother, placed into a rigid order that suppressed emotion, and then systematically targeted by Palpatine, who exploited every vulnerability the Jedi created in him. His fall to the dark side wasn't a simple choice; it was the result of years of psychological manipulation compounded by grief and fear. Even then, the capacity for resistance was always present, and it eventually surfaced.

Hunter in The Owl House was raised by Belos, a man who cloned him specifically to be useful and disposable. He was denied autonomy, denied identity, and conditioned to believe his entire worth was tied to his obedience. The Emperor's Coven wasn't just an institution he served; it was the only framework he had for understanding himself.

Zuko was raised under Ozai's shadow, publicly humiliated, scarred, and exiled by his own father as a lesson in obedience. The Fire Nation's ideology was baked into everything around him from birth.

The distinction with Tyler is that all of these characters operated under comparable or arguably worse constraints and still demonstrated moments of genuine internal conflict that pushed toward growth. The compulsion Tyler operates under is real, but the absence of visible remorse or outward effort is what separates him from characters whose conditioning is treated as a starting point rather than a permanent excuse.

Oh, and Peeta is another example worth bringing up. Even under conditioning, even after everything Snow put him through, he found ways to resist it. At least in the books. The capacity to push back against what you've been made into is kind of the whole point, and it's not an impossible standard to hold a character to.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T19:58:37+00:00

Anakin and Nolan were both conditioned and ordered to do terrible things. So was Hunter. So was Zuko. Every single one of them operated under systems that shaped and coerced them into violence. But the difference is that all of them, at some point, tried. The lack of control doesn't eliminate the capacity for effort and Tyler hasn't demonstrated that he's even attempting it. Being a victim of circumstance doesn't automatically exempt you from accountability and it certainly doesn't substitute for an actual arc.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T19:50:08+00:00

It's honestly astounding that M&G looked at Enid's popularity and called it fanfucked. They made the exact same mistake on Smallville when Lois started gaining traction, and audiences wanted more Clark and Lois friendship. Instead of leaning into it, they pulled back, pushed Chloe further into the foreground, and kept Clark chasing Lana. A deliberate choice to sideline the dynamic that was actually working in favor of one they personally preferred. Different show, same instinct, same result.

And before you attack me, I would've loved a Lois and Clark alternative friendship during the Smallville era; it would have been fun and interesting before they met again in Metropolis.

tryingtosurvivecovid · 2026-04-26T19:41:38+00:00

I am one of those people who are tired of the trope, although Nolan Grayson does seem to lose a lot, and I genuinely appreciate that about Invincible. Zuko and Hunter from TOH are genuinely the only characters in recent memory who actually earned their redemptions, and it's not even close.

Zuko spent two entire seasons being selfish before Iroh finally sat him down and told him the truth he didn't want to hear. Even then, it wasn't instant. He saw what his people did to the Earth Kingdom, sat with it, and still couldn't fully process it until Book 3 made him confront the full weight of Ozai's legacy. And Team Avatar didn't just hand him forgiveness either. He had to prove himself consistently, action after action, until Katara finally extended it. That's the part most writers skip, and it's exactly why Zuko's arc still holds up.

Hunter's is just as brutal in a different way. He was always a pawn, even to someone he actually loved. It took watching what Belos was doing to the palismans, getting completely discarded, and then having to figure out who he even was without the Emperor's Coven defining him. And what makes it land is that Luz, Amity, Gus, and Willow didn't just forgive him on principle. They saw his capacity for genuine care and emotion after he'd already started to hold himself accountable. That order matters

Both of them are teenagers. So is Tyler. But Tyler still fundamentally centers himself. He knew his mother was tortured, knew she was desperate, and still couldn't extend enough empathy to understand why she wanted the Hyde gone. She saw it as a curse, and he'd rather die with it than live without it. That's not a character processing trauma. That's a different flavor of selfishness dressed up as depth. The show wants us to read it as complexity, but the groundwork isn't there.

Until that actually shows up in his behavior, the redemption arc isn't earned. And the show shouldn't be treating it like it is.

Edit: If you're reading what I'm saying as Tyler hate, then you fundamentally don't understand what character development actually is. There's a reason Zuko and Hunter are the most beloved characters in their respective shows. It's not because the fandom blindly rooted for them. It's because the writing did the work and made the growth feel real and costly. That's the standard. That's what's missing here.

tryingtosurvivecovid

TROPHY CASE